Automated validation of the appearance of graphical user interfaces

ABSTRACT

According to embodiments of the present invention, a first metadata defining how a user interface associated with an application under test should appear is generated using one or more computer processors. An image of the user interface associated with the application under test that is invoked during a test run is captured using one or more one or more computer processors. The captured image is converted, using one or more computer processors, into one or more of a second metadata and text. The first metadata is compared, using one or more computer processors, to the second metadata and the text. In response to the comparison resulting in a difference between the first metadata and the second metadata, the image is stored, using one or more computer processors, and an assessment request is generated using one or more computer processors.

BACKGROUND

The present disclosure relates generally to the field of test automationtools, and more particularly to the automation of graphical userinterface validation. A graphical user interface (“GUI”) is a type ofuser interface that allows users to interact with electronic devicesthrough graphical icons and visual indicators, such as secondarynotation, as opposed to text-based interfaces, typed command labels, ortext navigation. In software development, graphical user interfacetesting involves testing a product's GUI to ascertain how theapplication and the user interact and whether the application performsproperly. This typically includes how the application handles keyboardand mouse input and how it displays a GUI widget, such as screen text,images, buttons, menus, dialog boxes, icons, and toolbars.

The testing of Web, Java®, Windows®, mobile, and other applications thatutilizes GUIs may be automated (e.g. programmatic and replayed buttonsclicks, text input, etc.) using conventional solutions. However, manualtesting is typically required to ensure that GUIs are rendered properlyas well as are easy to read and manipulate by a user. Potential issuesmay include a widget that is sized too small for a human to noticeand/or click, display of truncated text, and layouts that can lead to apoor user experience. In addition, such issues can become compoundedwhen GUIs are tested across different operating systems, browsers,languages, and/or locales. Current solutions involve both manual andautomated testing solutions. For example, manual testing requires atester to view and compare each aspect of the GUI. Image basedautomation can involve a comparison of the expected and actual bitmapimages.

SUMMARY

According to embodiments of the present invention, a first metadatadefining how a user interface associated with an application under testshould appear is generated using one or more computer processors. Animage of the user interface associated with the application under testthat is invoked during a test run is captured using one or more computerprocessors. The captured image is converted, using one or more computerprocessors, into one or more of a second metadata and text. The firstmetadata is compared, using one or more computer processors, to thesecond metadata and the text. In response to the comparison resulting ina difference between the first metadata and the second metadata, theimage is stored, using one or more computer processors, and anassessment request is generated using one or more computer processors.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an environment, in accordancewith an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 depicts a screenshot of a GUI rendered in English by a Webbrowser, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 depicts a screenshot of the GUI rendered in German by the Webbrowser, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart depicting the operational steps of a programfunction, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 5 depicts a block diagram of components of a test server executingthe program function, in accordance with an embodiment of the presentinvention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

With reference now to FIG. 1-5.

The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present inventionhave been presented for purposes of illustration but are not intended tobe exhaustive or limited to the embodiments disclosed. Manymodifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skillin the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the describedembodiments. The terminology used herein was chosen to best explain theprinciples of the embodiments, the practical application, or technicalimprovement over technologies found in the marketplace or to enableothers of ordinary skill in the art to understand the embodimentsdisclosed herein.

The present invention may be a system, a method, and/or a computerprogram product. The computer program product may include a computerreadable storage medium (or media) having computer readable programinstructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects of thepresent invention.

The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible device that canretain and store instructions for use by an instruction executiondevice. The computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but isnot limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device,an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, asemiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. A non-exhaustive list of more specific examples of thecomputer readable storage medium includes the following: a portablecomputer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), aread-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROMor Flash memory), a static random access memory (SRAM), a portablecompact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD),a memory stick, a floppy disk, a mechanically encoded device such aspunch-cards or raised structures in a groove having instructionsrecorded thereon, and any suitable combination of the foregoing. Acomputer readable storage medium, as used herein, is not to be construedas being transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freelypropagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagatingthrough a waveguide or other transmission media (e.g., light pulsespassing through a fiber-optic cable), or electrical signals transmittedthrough a wire.

Computer readable program instructions described herein can bedownloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a computerreadable storage medium or to an external computer or external storagedevice via a network, for example, the Internet, a local area network, awide area network, and/or a wireless network. The network may comprisecopper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wirelesstransmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers, and/oredge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in eachcomputing/processing device receives computer readable programinstructions from the network and forwards the computer readable programinstructions for storage in a computer readable storage medium withinthe respective computing/processing device.

Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations ofthe present invention may be assembler instructions,instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine instructions,machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions,state-setting data, or either source code or object code written in anycombination of one or more programming languages, including an objectoriented programming language such as Java®, Smalltalk, C++ or the like,and conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C”programming language or similar programming languages. The computerreadable program instructions may execute entirely on the user'scomputer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone softwarepackage, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer,or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario,the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through anytype of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide areanetwork (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer(for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).In some embodiments, electronic circuitry including, for example,programmable logic circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), orprogrammable logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readableprogram instructions by utilizing state information of the computerreadable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuitry,in order to perform aspects of the present invention.

Aspects of the present invention are described herein with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer readable program instructions.

These computer readable program instructions may be provided to aprocessor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, orother programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, suchthat the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computeror other programmable data processing apparatus, create means forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks. These computer readable program instructionsmay also be stored in a computer readable storage medium that can directa computer, a programmable data processing apparatus, and/or otherdevices to function in a particular manner, such that the computerreadable storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises anarticle of manufacture including instructions which implement aspects ofthe function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram blockor blocks.

The computer readable program instructions may also be loaded onto acomputer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other deviceto cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer,other programmable apparatus, or other device to produce a computerimplemented process, such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer, other programmable apparatus, or other device implement thefunctions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block orblocks.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods, and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof instructions, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). In some alternativeimplementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of theorder noted in the Figures. For example, two blocks shown in successionmay, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks maysometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon thefunctionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of theblock diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocksin the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implementedby special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specifiedfunctions or acts or carry out combinations of special purpose hardwareand computer instructions.

The testing of Web, Java®, Windows®, mobile, and other applications thatutilize a graphical user interface (GUI) may be automated (e.g.programmatic and replayed buttons clicks, text input, etc.) usingconventional solutions. Testing typically ensures that GUIs are renderedproperly as well as are easy to read and manipulate by a user. Potentialissues may include a widget that is sized too small for a human tonotice and/or click, truncated text, and layouts that can lead to a pooruser experience. In addition, such issues can become compounded whenGUIs must be tested across different operating systems, browsers,languages, and/or locales. Embodiments of the present invention seek toprovide a method, computer program product, and computer system forautomating the validation of the appearance of GUIs.

Briefly, metadata is generated that defines how a particular GUI shouldappear. This metadata has the structure of a markup language, whichincludes but is not limited to HyperText Markup Language (HTML), UserInterface Language (XUL), and Extensible Application Markup Language(XAML). However, the generated metadata defines what is displayed, suchas widgets and layouts, rather than how to display such information.During a GUI testing run images of the application under test arecaptured as runtime metadata. Image and optical character recognition(“OCR”) algorithms can be used to convert the image into metadata andtext. The runtime metadata is compared to the comparison metadata. Ifthere is a difference therein, the captured image is saved, and anotification is generated that discloses that the captured imagerequires further review by a tester/user.

Certain aspects of the present invention seek to identify GUI layoutsand other issues when using different operating systems. Globalizationissues, such as truncation of long strings, can also be identified. Theuse of metadata can allow for a higher level representation of anapplication's GUI compared to the use of bitmap images. Since metadatafiles are typically smaller than image files, a metadata database canalso require less storage space than a corresponding image database.

Embodiments of the present invention will now be described in detailwith reference to the Figures. FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating anenvironment, generally designated 100, in accordance with one embodimentof the present invention.

Environment 100 includes test server 130 and exemplary information store120, all interconnected over network 110. Network 110 can be, forexample, a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN), such asthe Internet, or a combination of the two, and can include wired,wireless, or fiber optic connections. Network 110 may be a distributedcomputing environment utilizing clustered computers and components thatact as a single pool of seamless resources, as is common in data centersand with cloud computing applications or “clouds”. In general, network110 can be any combination of connections and protocols that willsupport communications between test server 130 and exemplary informationstore 120.

In various embodiments of the present invention, test server 130 may bea laptop computer, a tablet computer, a netbook computer, a personalcomputer (PC), a desktop computer, a server, a personal digitalassistant (PDA), a smart phone, or any programmable electronic devicecapable of communicating with exemplary information store 120 vianetwork 110. Exemplary information store 120 is an informationrepository that includes GUI test files 122, which are GUI files thatrequire testing. In certain embodiments, exemplary information store 120is not included in test server 130, but rather communicates with testserver 130 via network 110. Test server 130 includes program function134 and exemplary information store 136.

Exemplary information store 136 is in communication with programfunction 134, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.Exemplary information store 136 includes comparison metadata file 135,runtime metadata file 137, and test data 138. Comparison metadata file135 can include GUI metadata that is generated manually orautomatically, for example, by program function 134. Test data 138includes test results generated by program function 134. Runtimemetadata file 137 includes metadata that is generated by programfunction 134 of a particular test GUI that is included in GUI test files122.

Program function 134 is software that tests GUIs using metadata, inaccordance with an embodiment of the present invention. Program function134 can generate metadata that defines how a GUI is associated with anapplication under test. Metadata generated by program function 134defines the desired visual layout of GUIs, such as GUIs included in GUItest files 122, scheduled for validation and specifies the widgets inthe application's windows, pages, and dialogs. A GUI widget is anelement that displays an information arrangement that is changeable bythe user, such as a window or a text box. Widgets provide a singleinteraction point for the direct manipulation of a given kind of data.In this way, widgets are basic visual building blocks which, combined inan application, hold all the data processed by the application and theavailable interactions on this data.

Applicable widgets include, but are not limited to, widgets that areutilized for the selection and display of collections, such as checkboxes, radio buttons, and split button; sliders, list boxes, spinners,drop-down lists. Navigation widgets, such as links, tabs, andscrollbars; text/value input, such as text boxes and combo boxes;output, such as labels, tooltips, balloon help, status bars, progressbars, and infobars are applicable. In addition, widgets that areutilized as containers, such as windows, collapsible panels, modalwindows, dialog boxes, utility windows, and frames are also applicable.

Program function 134 can monitor, present, and store the status,results, time stamp, length, and other information that is associatedwith a GUI metadata comparison. Program function 134 can select a testGUI, for example, from GUI test files 122, to test. Program function 134can load and execute the GUI comparison. Program function 134 canpresent and store test results.

Program function 134 can generate metadata for a window, page, or dialogbox that includes intrinsic properties, such as captions, as well as thewidgets and their associated layouts. Program function 134 can generatemetadata formatted in a markup language, such as HTML, XUL, XAML, andXML. Program function 134 can generate metadata formatted in anextension of a markup language. The metadata generated can includewidget type, intrinsic properties, such as size, and relative position.For text widgets, such as labels and default text in a text box, programfunction 134 can generate metadata that includes a globalizationidentifier rather than the actual included text, which may ensure thatthe generated metadata is both language and locale agnostic. Metadataglobalization identifiers are the same as the application's identifiersand permit the retrieval of the application's associated translationbundles.

Here, the various ID attributes specify the globalization identifiers.The layout elements identify the relative positions of the widgets in adevice-agnostic manner as opposed to a pixel. Program function 134 canrender GUIs according to a particular Web browser or a version thereof.Program function 134 can capture an image of a GUI. Program function 134can convert captured GUI images into metadata and/or text (discussedbelow). Program function 134 can compare metadata, such as the metadatathat is included in runtime metadata file 137 and comparison metadatafile 135, to ascertain differences therein. Program function 134 cangenerate notifications that inform a tester/user of a particular GUIthat requires additional testing. Program function 134 can identify thecontext in which images are displayed. For example, program function 134can identify that a login dialog is displayed after the user clicks aparticular button. In an embodiment, program function 134 translatestext from one language to another, for example, from English to German.In an embodiment, program function 134 utilizes image capture and/orobject character recognition algorithms to convert an image into text.

FIGS. 2 and 3 are utilized in the description of FIG. 4. FIG. 2 depictsa screenshot of a GUI rendered in English by program function 134according to a particular Web browser, in accordance with an embodimentof the present invention. FIG. 3 depicts a screenshot of the GUIrendered in German by program function 134 according to the same Webbrowser. Program function 134 monitors GUI test selections that occurwithin environment 100. A user selects a GUI from GUI test files 122 fortesting. In response, program function 134 generates the associatedcomparison metadata disclosed below and stores it in comparison metadatafile 135.

<Dialog ID=“LoginDialog”>  <LayoutGrid>  <LayoutRow>   <LayoutColumn>  <Label ID=“UserNameLabel”/>   </LayoutColumn>   <LayoutColumn>  <TextBox/>   </LayoutColumn>  </LayoutRow>  <LayoutRow>  <LayoutColumn>   <Label ID=“PasswordLabel”/>   </LayoutColumn>  <LayoutColumn>   <PasswordTextBox/>   </LayoutColumn>  </LayoutRow> <LayoutRow>   <LayoutColumn>   <CheckBox ID=“RememberCheckBox”/>  </LayoutColumn>  </LayoutRow>  <LayoutRow>   <LayoutColumn>  <PushButton ID=“LoginButton”/>   </LayoutColumn>  </LayoutRow> </LayoutGrid> </Dialog>

Program function 134 can utilize image segmentation to capture,identify, and separate a GUI image into various widgets. Programfunction 134 can retrieve displayed text from each captured image usingoptical character recognition and text that is associated with theenclosing widget, such as label and text box.

Once comparison metadata has been generated, program function 135renders the GUI in the test environment, for example, a rendering of theGUI using the German language within the browser and generates runtimemetadata that is stored in runtime metadata file 137. Program function134 compares the generated comparison metadata to the generated runtimemetadata to determine any differences therein. In certain embodiments,program function 134 utilizes a best fit algorithm to find the runtimemetadata that most closely matches the comparison metadata. Here, if adifference is found, program function 134 generates a notification thatinforms the user/tester that further assessment of the particular GUI isneeded. For labels and other widgets with associated text, programfunction 134 can compare the expected and actual text to identifyunexpected text, mistranslations, truncation of displayed text, or othertext display issues.

In the metadata disclosed above, ID values, such as LoginDialog,UsernameLabel, PasswordLabel, RememberCheckBox, LoginButton, are stringresource identifiers that are used by program function 134 to lookup thecorresponding string for the given locale. For example, program function134 determines that the text associated with the LoginDialog ID for anEnglish speaking locale is “User Login”, whereas for a German speakinglocale it's “Benutzeranmeldung”. Program function 134 compares thecomparison metadata corresponding to FIG. 2 that is included incomparison metadata file 135 with the runtime metadata corresponding tothe GUI of FIG. 3 that is included in runtime metadata file 137 anddetermines the following issues disclosed in Table 1 and generates acorresponding notification for the user/tester.

TABLE 1 1. UserNameLabel text has been truncated. The text should be“Benutzername” rather than “Benutzerna”. 2. Password label text haswrapped with the colon on a separate line. 3. Password is shown in plaintext. 4. LoginButton text is too large for the containing widget.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart depicting operational steps of program function134, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention. Programfunction 134 generates a first metadata defining how a user interfacethat is associated with an application under test should appear (step400). Program function 134 captures an image of the application undertest that is invoked during a test run (step 410). Program function 134converts the captured image into a second metadata and text (step 420).Program function 134 compares the first metadata to the second metadataand the text (step 430). Program function 134 determines whether thereis a difference between the first metadata and the second metadata andtext (decisional 440).

If program function 134 determines that there is a difference betweenthe first metadata and the second metadata and text (“yes” branch,decisional 440), then program function 134 saves the captured image andmarks the test for tester assessment (step 460). For example, markingthe test for tester assessment can involve generating a notificationthat discloses the test failure and/or that an assessment by thetester/user is required. If program function 134 determines that thereis no difference between the first metadata and the second metadata andtext (“no” branch, decisional 440), then program function 134 marks thetest as successful (step 450).

FIG. 5 depicts a block diagram of components of test server inaccordance with an illustrative embodiment of the present invention. Itshould be appreciated that FIG. 5 provides only an illustration of oneimplementation and does not imply any limitations with regard to theenvironments in which different embodiments may be implemented. Manymodifications to the depicted environment may be made.

Test server 130 includes communications fabric 502, which providescommunications between computer processor(s) 504, memory 506, persistentstorage 508, communications unit 510, and input/output (I/O)interface(s) 512. Communications fabric 502 can be implemented with anyarchitecture designed for passing data and/or control informationbetween processors (such as microprocessors, communications, and networkprocessors, etc.), system memory, peripheral devices, and any otherhardware components within a system. For example, communications fabric502 can be implemented with one or more buses.

Memory 506 and persistent storage 508 are computer readable storagemedia. In this embodiment, memory 506 includes random access memory(RAM) 514 and cache memory 516. In general, memory 506 can include anysuitable volatile or non-volatile computer readable storage media.

Program function 134 is stored in persistent storage 508 for executionand/or access by one or more of the respective computer processor(s) 504via one or more memories of memory 506. In this embodiment, persistentstorage 508 includes a magnetic hard disk drive. Alternatively, or inaddition to a magnetic hard disk drive, persistent storage 508 caninclude a solid-state hard drive, a semiconductor storage device, aread-only memory (ROM),an erasable programmable read-only memory(EPROM), a flash memory, or any other computer readable storage mediathat is capable of storing program instructions or digital information.

The media used by persistent storage 508 may also be removable. Forexample, a removable hard drive may be used for persistent storage 508.Other examples include optical and magnetic disks, thumb drives, andsmart cards that are inserted into a drive for transfer onto anothercomputer readable storage medium that is also part of persistent storage508.

Communications unit 510, in these examples, provides for communicationswith other data processing systems or devices included in environment100. In these examples, communications unit 510 includes one or morenetwork interface cards. Communications unit 510 may providecommunications through the use of either or both physical and wirelesscommunications links. Program function 134 may be downloaded topersistent storage 508 through communications unit 510.

I/O interface(s) 512 allows for input and output of data with otherdevices that may be connected to test server 130. For example, I/Ointerface(s) 512 may provide a connection to external device(s) 518 suchas a keyboard, a keypad, a touch screen, and/or some other suitableinput device. External device(s) 518 can also include portable computerreadable storage media such as, for example, thumb drives, portableoptical or magnetic disks, and memory cards. Software and data used topractice embodiments of the present invention, e.g., program function134, can be stored on such portable computer readable storage media andcan be loaded onto persistent storage 508 via I/O interface(s) 512. I/Ointerface(s) 512 also connects to a display 520. Display 520 provides amechanism to display data to a user and may be, for example, a computermonitor.

The programs described herein are identified based upon the applicationfor which they are implemented in a specific embodiment of theinvention. However, it should be appreciated that any particular programnomenclature herein is used merely for convenience; and thus, theinvention should not be limited to use solely in any specificapplication identified and/or implied by such nomenclature.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method comprising: generating, using one ormore computer processors, a first metadata defining how a user interfaceassociated with an application should appear; capturing, using one ormore computer processors, an image of the user interface associated withthe application during a test run; converting, using one or morecomputer processors, the captured image into one or more of a secondmetadata and text; and comparing, using one or more computer processors,the first metadata to the second metadata and the text; in response tothe comparison resulting in a difference between the first metadata andthe second metadata, storing, using one or more computer processors, theimage and generating, using one or more computer processors, anassessment request.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein metadata that isassociated with one or more of a window, page, or dialog box comprises acaption, software widget, and associated layout.
 3. The method of claim1, wherein metadata that is associated with one or more of a softwarewidget comprises widget type, size, and relative position.
 4. The methodof claim 1, wherein metadata that is associated with text widgetscomprise a globalization identifier.
 5. The method of claim 1, whereinone or more of the first metadata and the second metadata are generatedusing a markup language.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the step ofconverting, using the one or more computer processors, the capturedimage comprises using image segmentation to identify and separateelements included in the captured image.
 7. A computer program productcomprising: one or more computer readable tangible storage media andprogram instructions stored on the one or more computer readabletangible storage media, the program instructions executable by one ormore processors to: generate a first metadata defining how a userinterface associated with an application should appear; capture an imageof the user interface associated with the application during a test run;convert the captured image into one or more of a second metadata andtext; and compare the first metadata to the second metadata and thetext; in response to the comparison resulting in a difference betweenthe first metadata and the second metadata, store the image and generatean assessment request.
 8. The computer program product of claim 7,wherein metadata that is associated with one or more of a window, page,or dialog box comprises a caption, software widget, and associatedlayout.
 9. The computer program product of claim 7, wherein metadatathat is associated with one or more of a software widget compriseswidget type, size, and relative position.
 10. The computer programproduct of claim 7, wherein metadata that is associated with textwidgets comprise a globalization identifier.
 11. The computer programproduct of claim 7, wherein one or more of the first metadata and thesecond metadata are generated using a markup language.
 12. The computerprogram product of claim 7, wherein the computer instructions to convertthe captured image comprise computer instructions to use imagesegmentation to identify and separate elements included in the capturedimage.
 13. A computer system comprises: one or more computer processors;one or more computer readable tangible storage media; programinstructions stored on the one or more computer readable tangiblestorage media for execution by at least one of the one or more computerprocessors, the program instructions comprising program instructions to:generate a first metadata defining how a user interface associated withan application should appear; capture an image of the user interfaceassociated with the application during a test run; convert the capturedimage into one or more of a second metadata and text; and compare thefirst metadata to the second metadata and the text; in response to thecomparison resulting in a difference between the first metadata and thesecond metadata, store the image and generate an assessment request. 14.The computer system of claim 13, wherein metadata that is associatedwith one or more of a window, page, or dialog box comprises a caption,software widget, and associated layout.
 15. The computer system of claim13, wherein metadata that is associated with one or more of a softwarewidget comprises widget type, size, and relative position.
 16. Thecomputer system of claim 13, wherein metadata that is associated withtext widgets comprise a globalization identifier.
 17. The computersystem of claim 13, wherein one or more of the first metadata and thesecond metadata are generated using a markup language.
 18. The computersystem of claim 13, wherein the program instructions to convert thecaptured image comprise program instructions to use image segmentationto identify and separate elements included in the captured image.